Numbers 1:2. Why a military census if God can beat back an entire army with only 300 good men?
Commentaries suggest that this count was to show the faithfulness of God in multiplying Israel, as He had promised to do. Also, to prepare them for the division of territories in the Promised Land.
But thirdly it is said that this would better prepare them for their military episodes later. It is this purpose which gives rise to my question, and should cause us to understand the ways of God a bit better. Yes, God can shake a city to the ground without a sword or a bow, as at Jericho. God can kill the entire Assyrian army. And he does that much later in Israel’s history.
But none of that is His normal way of working, or so it seems. It seems that He prefers to work in us and with us as opposed to, for us. He desires partnership, not only Lordship. He wants obedience but also relationship to flow out of His dealings with us. It is a curious thing, and gives rise to many more questions, but it is certainly His identifiable Way in Scripture. Tongues of fire at Pentecost, but not at Caesarea. Five thousand fed in one place, others scurry to the next village for food. Nothing predictable but always faithful and sufficient.
Numbers 5:14. Why would a “spirit of jealousy” come on a man if his adulterous wife had been so far undetected? And why is the offending male not dealt with in this passage?
In Scripture there are several emotions called “spirit of” (fear, fornication, etc) that may not be in the same category as Holy Spirit or demon spirit, but rather a strong feeling of, as in the NIV. In this case, a husband has this growing suspicion that his wife has been unfaithful.
Notice, his thought is tested, showing that it is definitely not the Spirit of God, Who needs no test. Notice also that he could well be thinking the absolute truth, which seems to preclude demon spirits, who would not be pointing to actions favorable to their own cause and wanting them condemned by a priest.
To the first question above: There could be clues that the undetected wife is giving. She may not want to be with her spouse. There could be an ongoing rift between the two, but a sudden change in her attitude and attire in spite of the home-based separation. Why is she so happy all of a sudden?
To the latter question: Leviticus 20:10 covers the male offender. Immediate death when discovered, for the male and the female.
Numbers 5:17. What was special about the mixture of dust and water? Was it the water or the actual hand of God that brought the curse upon the adulterous woman?
Holy water. Dust from the ground of the Holy Temple, reminding her that we all must return to dust one day. If the dust were lethal, then she would suffer agony even if she were innocent. No, it seems there was nothing in the mixture that caused the problems to come, other than the bitterness of taste equaling the bitterness of the situation. The very hand of God came against her if found guilty.
There seems to be little evidence of such an ordeal ever having been done in Israel. It could be avoided by confession and/or divorce. For a husband to bring her to the priest in this manner would expose the situation before Israel, and bring shame to him as well as her. Better to take care of this privately.
There seem to be several categories for punishment of this awful sin of adultery. Leviticus demands death to both adulterers, clearly convicted of their sin . Jesus had to deal with a woman taken in adultery, for which the punishment was to be stoning.
For one who concealed the evidence, as here in Numbers, a tortured episode before Israel, leading to a slow death or at least deformity for life.
But Jesus indicates that although adultery of the other party is the one exception to the approval of divorce, the death penalty was not necessarily in place all though Israel’s history. For those who lived, expulsion from fellowship, lacking of support, and ongoing shame, seem to have been punishment enough.
Numbers 11:19-23. Note the similarities between the lead up to the feeding of the 5,000 and the feeding here of the 3 million.
Moses, on the one hand, and Philip on the other, want to know how in the world they are going to provide such a feast out here in the wilderness.
Numbers 12:1. Why another wife for Moses? See question above about Zipporah. Why a Cushite? Was she possibly one of the “mixed” multitude?
This was probably not just another reference to Zipporah. Why would they be talking about her forty years after the fact?
It could be that Zipporah had died. Had she ever been on the journey with him, or did she turn back many years before?
Israel was forbidden to marry a Canaanite. The Cushites of Arabia or Ethiopia did not of course fall into that category. It seems to me that she was indeed merely one of the many foreigners who had grown weary of Egypt and came along with Moses to a better land.
Older
Top
